D-SLR camera for taking action shots & video of shooters

[Chief Rick]

Looking to buy a D-SLR camera in order to to take action shots and record HD video at our shoots, among other things.

 

Recommendations?

[August West, SASS #45079]

Iphone.

[McCandless]

Nikon D3400 kit the 18-55mm and the 70-300mm lenses and extra battery and extra storage card.  There have been some great deals on the kit at Sams.  Cheaper than Amazon.  Just visited a two-day match and rolled off more'n 700 images before I knew it.

I just bought a 55-200mm Vibration Reduction (VR) image stabilization lens, as an all-around match action lens.  Yeah, I've got bitten by the bug again.

Haven't been doing the SLR thing since the 80's... still have all my old cameras, lenses and filters... pack rat can't get rid of "stuff"!

[Desert Pete SASS #42168]

Nikon D7200 or D7500.  The 55-200mm VR lenses is really nice.

 

2 hours ago, McCandless said:

Nikon D3400 kit the 18-55mm and the 70-300mm lenses and extra battery and extra storage card.  There have been some great deals on the kit at Sams.  Cheaper than Amazon.  Just visited a two-day match and rolled off more'n 700 images before I knew it.

I just bought a 55-200mm Vibration Reduction (VR) image stabilization lens, as an all-around match action lens.  Yeah, I've got bitten by the bug again.

Haven't been doing the SLR thing since the 80's... still have all my old cameras, lenses and filters... pack rat can't get rid of "stuff"!

 

[Mad Dog Jack, SASS #77862]

8 hours ago, August West, SASS #45079 said:

Iphone.

I have a Nikon D7000 that does both well, but I use my Iphone most of the time now

[Warden Callaway]

A couple of thoughts. 

 

If you're going to make photos and video for the general audience to view on PC or even HD TV,  any of the cheap action cameras will make video that will exceed the quality of the device viewing it.  The latest smart phones will make far better photos and videos than an average PC or TV can take advantage of.

 

Anything greater than 1080HD,  the video file size will be enormous.  People with slow internet connections will be frustrated trying to watch them.  

 

If you plan to make videos that are edited,  you'll need good software and all the horsepower in a PC that you can afford.  I had a PC built for video editing with high end graphic boards, tons of processor memory and then had that upgraded and it's still slower than I'd like.  I just added a 4 terabyte external hard drive to move stuff off the PC file storage.  The raw video files become HUGE even at 1080HD.  With editing software,  you can crop, pan, zoom,  freeze frame,  slow motion,  speed up, etc to add action and interest to the video. You can balance out contrast,  add titles and text, transitions from clip to clip. 

 

Sound is a big factor.   Some of my cameras pick up sound better than others.  One action cam has the microphone in front and does pretty good. Another has it on the side and does a lousy job unless I set it up in a position the microphone away from the othe posse. I watch videos made by others and the sound of all the shots fired are all just a pop, pop, pop, no matter if they are shooting rifle, pistol, shotgun, smokeless,  black powder,  close or far.  Probably the sound recording is leveling out the sound instead of capturing the true sound.  Of the cameras I have, the iVUE POV camera glasses do by far the best job of picking up sound and filtering out wind noise.

 

Basically,  I use cheap action cameras set on tripods in front of the stage because,  1) That's where you can see the action.  2) I don't have to looking over the TO's shoulder trying to get a good angle. 3) They are cheap enough (all less than $100) so if one gets blasted, no big loss. (Not happened yet in probably over 100 uses in past 3 years.)  4) I can set them up and go on with shooting the match.

 

 

[BankRoll]

Canon and Nikon both make excellent cameras, with a wide range of prices and features.  Then you can go down the rabbit hole of lenses and other accessories. 

 

Yes, iphones are convenient and take OK pics and videos (I use mine a lot).  And while iphones do record in HD, the lens is small and the QUALITY of the image can't hold a candle to what a DLSR can do in the right hands.  It's convenience vs. quality.

 

Lastly, if you want to make videos that people enjoy watching .... more important that the camera you use or even the image quality, is the angles you get and how much editing you do.

[Kid Russell]

Gotta throw my hat in the ring on this one. I have a Google Pixel II XL, Nikon D 90 and a Panasonic DC-ZS70.  Just as one shotgun or rifle can do it all, no camera is really good at every thing. The Google camera is the best on the market now but it not the equal to the  DSLR  or the pocket camera. I love my DSLR but it gets left behind a lot in favor of the compact Panasonic. A DSLR is like a full sized 1911 which I dearly love, but I do not try to carry it concealed when it is 90 degrees outside.  The Google phone is like a 25 acp Colt Vest Pocket pistol .....it is better than a stick . The compact camera is somewhere in between.  My Compact Panasonic uses a Leica lens. shoots in RAW (great if you use Photoshop) and has a zoom lens that is equal to a 24 mm wide angle to 700 mm telephoto  and then digital zoom to 1200 mm. The Panasonic shoots HD video and shoots burst mode for action shots. The best feature is that it is with you all the time. Photographs other than low light are equal to any DSLR printed up to 16x20 inches. I am sure that Nikon and Cannon have similar offerings.  I am a retired Computer Graphics and Photography  teacher that has transition from a view camera in Art School to a smart phone. A larger format camera is always better as far as quality, but not always practical to carry around. The compact camera will come close to doing it all and it will always be at hand to use.

[McCandless]

1 hour ago, BankRoll said:

Canon and Nikon both make excellent cameras, with a wide range of prices and features.  Then you can go down the rabbit hole of lenses and other accessories. 

 

Yes, iphones are convenient and take OK pics and videos (I use mine a lot).  And while iphones do record in HD, the lens is small and the QUALITY of the image can't hold a candle to what a DLSR can do in the right hands.  It's convenience vs. quality.

 

Lastly, if you want to make videos that people enjoy watching .... more important that the camera you use or even the image quality, is the angles you get and how much editing you do.

+1 

I have one of the top-of-the-line cell phone cameras.  I use it often for spur of the moment shots.  But the pictures taken with the DSLR are much higher quality.  I purposely didn't go for a top end DSLR because I'm constantly being peppered by splashback, and have saw a camera dented by it.  I also use UV filters to protect the lenses.  No need to have the glass damaged when it can be easily protected.  There are many reviews available on-line for an incredible array of cameras and lenses.  See what fits into your budget, compare specs and features.  Then when you get one, prepare to spend several evenings with a cool beverage and the instruction manual.

[McCandless]

3 minutes ago, Kid Russell said:

 A larger format camera is always better as far as quality, but not always practical to carry around. The compact camera will come close to doing it all and it will always be at hand to use.

yup.  I started with a twin lens reflex Yashica D, eons ago.  This thread has brought back memories of times spent in the darkroom, loading rolls of film into developing canisters. contact prints, and playing with enlargers.  Oy!  That was soooo long ago, but seems like yesterday.   Thanks for the memories! 

 

 

[Hollywood]

One suggestion:  Maybe don't limit yourself to a DSLR.  I use DSLR's, pocket cameras and almost everything else (except for my phone...) for vids and stills.  And what I really find to be the best overall "general purpose" rig is a bridge camera (in my case a Sony RX10).  Both the RX10 and the Panasonic FZ2500 (very similar in their specs, very different in their user interface) have excellent glass, 1" sensors (for better detail and dynamic range than you will ever get out of a cell phone), very effective and functional optical zoom ranges and image stabilization, video capabilities up to 4k, ability to use external mics, and all in a very manageable and compact package.

 

Yes, you give up the some by not having a MFT/APS-C/Full Frame sensor like you will get in a DSLR, but you will still get all of the image quality you need (and more).  Low light performance is not quite as good as on a DSLR, but we usually shoot in pretty well lit situations.  And you are "stuck" with the built-in focal length range (as opposed to the ultimate focal length flexibility you get with a DSLR), but I've found that the 24-200 zoom lens I have on my first gen RX10 (later RX10's and the FZ2500 have a longer zoom length) is perfectly suited to shooting CAS events (and plenty of other things). 

 

It has become my go-to rig as it is so flexible and so portable.  The DSLRs generally stay at home unless there is a shoot where they are specifically needed.

 

Also, take note of what has been said above.  Working with 4k video takes lots of CPU and GPU power, and lots of RAM.  It definitely gives you the benefit of the most detail and flexibility in post (for example you can "zoom in" on video shot in 4k by up to 400% and still end up with full HD output).  But it takes lots of computer power to work with it efficiently/effectively.  It even takes some pretty good computer power just to watch 4k video out of the camera, without lots of freezing and other artifacts.  I don't find myself shooting in 4k very often.  I really only do it when I can't physically get the framing I want of the shot, and know that I'll need to do some zooming in post.  I mostly frame it how I want and just shoot in 1080p (full HD), sometimes going up to 2.7k for flexibility in post, but only rarely shooting in full 4k.

[McCandless]

32 minutes ago, Hollywood said:

Sony RX10

Ooooh, nice!

[Grizzly Dave]

I use Midland Action Cams for video, and either pull stills from the video in the editor, or take them with my call phone or cheap point and shoot camera.

 

would love a nice DSLR but can't justify the cost for a hobby within a hobby.

 

Now if I could find someone to trade me a new  DSLR for a couple of old Nikon film cameras that I no longer use, that would be the ticket.

 

I use Sony Movie Studio Platinum 12.0 for editing, way more features than I'll ever use.

 

 

[Chief Rick]

10 hours ago, Hollywood said:

But it takes lots of computer power to work with it efficiently/effectively.  It even takes some pretty good computer power just to watch 4k video out of the camera, without lots of freezing and other artifacts.  

Currently running an Intel Core i7-7700HQ CPU @ 2.8GHz with 16GB DDR4 RAM and NVIDIA GeForce GTX1060 with 6GB GDDR5 RAM.  256GB SSD and 1TB hard drive.

[Rooster Cognizant]

For action shots, it's more about the lens, and less about the camera. Look for something with a large (or numerically small) aperture - F2.8 or less - preferably less.

[McCandless]

All depends on your budget.  Just like our guns.  You can spend hundreds or you can spend thousands.  Just depends on if your goals, do you want to be a serious hobbyist, turning out high end still photographs?  Or, do you just want to capture images and videos for a club's website/social media site.  If the later, get in touch with Jed I Knight, (you can find his videos and contact info on Youtube.  He's gone through many cameras until he found what worked for him.  He can tell you a lot about his experiences "getting it right"... 

For more "serious" still photography, well... it's a process of your artistic eye, the equipment, and "post"...  anyway, it's all in what you want to accomplish and the budget you decide on.

 

I'll never be anywhere near the equal of Perry Weinberg:

 

Just like I'll never be a Deuce Stevens:

 

 

[BankRoll]

One more thing .... whatever camera you decide on, please make sure to SHARE YOUR WORK.  The SASS community needs more folks taking and sharing fun pictures and video.  I realize it takes a lot of extra effort to get good shots during a match, and then many hours back home editing ..... but the payoff to the community is worth it.

 

I've made a handful of videos from matches and posted them to YouTube.  It's amazing how many people have thanked me and said how much they enjoy watching the video and showing it to friends and family.  Preserving memories is important. 

[Chief Rick]

1 hour ago, BankRoll said:

One more thing .... whatever camera you decide on, please make sure to SHARE YOUR WORK.  The SASS community needs more folks taking and sharing fun pictures and video.  I realize it takes a lot of extra effort to get good shots during a match, and then many hours back home editing ..... but the payoff to the community is worth it.

 

I've made a handful of videos from matches and posted them to YouTube.  It's amazing how many people have thanked me and said how much they enjoy watching the video and showing it to friends and family.  Preserving memories is important. 

I have a YouTube channel and was doing an ok job of posting videos from my Go-pro until I moved a little over a year ago. Other things took priority over shooting. 

 

Trying to get back into shooting and taking pictures and video. 

 

The Go-pro is ok for hat mounted POV videos but not great. I have a 3 & 3+. I understand the newer ones are better, but...

[Warden Callaway]

Just my opinion based on a little experience,  the GoPro is overpriced and over rated.   I have friends in Iowa that have about 8 YouTube channels and a bunch of GoPro and other cameras.  When I started sending him videos shot with my cheap Chinese action cam, his comments were the video and sound was much better than what he gets from his GoPro.  

 

Our youngest son and daughter-in-law gave me a GoPro Sessions 5 for Christmas.  I'm not impressed with it. Difficult to use and quality of video and sound not as good as the iVUE POV glasses.